Please make your changes more explicit

When you are deprecating tags and so on, please make it explicit (instead of simply adding a redirect, explain the change of tagging). Even when it's easy to guess what happened, it's better to add an warning.
Also, please don't add redirects of pages in other languages to pages in english. --Jgpacker (talk) 13:27, 19 July 2014 (UTC)

New template

Hi, I created a new template based on the snippet of wiki code you have been adding on the wiki. It's Template:PossibleSynonym. You can see an example here. (note that it automatically adds the right category. --Jgpacker (talk) 12:40, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree. Recently I found out a user renamed all leisure=grass to landuse=grass and all leisure=sport_centre to leisure=sports_centre because of this (the latter is a trivial change, however the first not so much). At the very least the wording should be changed from "Help fix it!" to something else. --Jgpacker (talk) 22:02, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

color:#D8D8D8" and nonsense tags

Tag:craft=carpenter - about this tag page. I understand you, but Any tags you like. There nothing wiki team can do. Some mappers just use these tags already. If you really want to change tagging, you should use Proposal process. You need to speak with people at tagging@openstreetmap.org, not at wiki. Xxzme (talk) 08:40, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I never removed any documentation. I just made it clear that these tags were never approved in any way and as someone else pointed out before me were copy&paste from Wikipedia, with what looks like no discussion. Right now the page again looks like this is some elaborate agreed tagging scheme, when 50% of the tags are not used at all. If someone has to create a proposal then it's the person who wants this style of tagging. --AndiG88 (talk) 16:10, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

I do no not accuse you in content removal, I'm fine with that. Well problem is that proposal in not really required to create any tag page. User may create craziest tag combinations, map dozen of them, document on wiki and do nothing else. It will be perfectly valid. This is what Any tags you like means. It very flexible, since everybody can do anything with new tags, but there drawbacks. There may be even worse situations, when we have no documentation at wiki, but there crazies tags mapped everywhere. Because again, Any tags you like. You don't have to document any of your new tags at all. It saves time for mapper who start everything. We should not treat his possibly usefull job as crazy. Other mappers may improve existing (at least documented at wiki) tagging scheme, so will get more sane results. Not everybody have time to map/tag everything "exactly" or "precisely" or for every possible use-case on earth, things should be improved over time. This how OSM works. If you have better schema than copy&pasting from wikipedia. If you know how to make set of Verifiable tags, then you should contact tagging list. If you have good idea how to improve existing tagging scheme, you may send you proposal to tagging@openstreetmap.org. Again, you may read about proposal process here: Proposal process. Xxzme (talk) 16:27, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

Gym tagging situation

I did a lot of work yesterday to try to rearrange things so that the Gym / Fitness centre tagging problem is clear (The tagging is not clear, but the problem is now clear). I've copied text from your proposal, to include those arguments in favour of using the word "gym", but I noticed you wrote that a few days after also creating the page De:Tag:leisure=fitness_centre. So that seems weird. I think this is my favourite option. 'leisure=fitness_centre'. ...given the problems spelled out. What do you think? -- Harry Wood (talk) 09:31, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

KeyDescription template

Hi, I don't understand why you are rewriting the Template:KeyDescription in some of the pages you change, sometimes removing information already available (like combination=x, or in onXYZ=x parameters), and always adding the practically useless parameters "float", "class", "languagelinks" and so on.
Thanks for adding images though.
Also, although there isn't a consensus on that, personally I prefer that people don't change the normal space formatting of the template (one or zero spaces between between words) for one that only makes sense when using a monospace font. Cheers
--Jgpacker (talk) 18:53, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I usually replace the whole template, because the templates used lack certain fields and this seems to be the fastes way to make sure I have the complete one everywhere. I also usually only remove usefull combination, because it seems pretty unnecessary to have that reapeated everywhere, if I removed more then mostly not intentional, often I even add see also. It's obvious a comany POI should have a name, address, phone, website etc. craft is the only place where I have seen this copy&pasted everywhere, on shop= or amenity= you don't find 10 tags like that anywhere, I think it's a distraction from important stuff like cuisine=, atm= etc.

As far as changing the spacing have I done that? I actually really like the spacing on the template which is another reason I replace the old one everywhere, because the new one gives a much better overview. --AndiG88 (talk) 19:11, 22 December 2014 (UTC)

I would appreciate if you didn't add rarely used parameters to the keydescription template (especially lang, class, float, style and languagelinks). The documentation can be easily updated and is often necessary to be able to use these parameters. I also dislike your change in spacing because it only makes sense in a monospace font (which is not often the case). I don't ask you to change it back, but preferably do not change it from normal spacing to this other spacing. Also, two little things: (1) preferably use a unordered list inside the "seeAlso" and "combination" parameters (i.e. add asterisks to make it a list) and (2) I think it's better to put info boxes below the language bar (which is added by Template:Description). It seems to be easier on the eye. Cheers --Jgpacker (talk) 20:33, 29 December 2014 (UTC)

#REDIRECT instead of keeping pages with DISCOURAGED in the description?

For deprecated tags, there are some pages like shop=fishmonger, which have "DISCOURAGED - Use shop=seafood instead" as the description.

However, some tags do not show any description in Taginfo. Sometimes this is due to a missing description parameter in the template tag, but other times it is because the entire wiki page has been replaced by a redirect. For example, shop=insurance is just an automatic redirect to office=insurance, so the description on Taginfo is blank. What's the rationale for creating an automatic redirect instead of retaining the page with "status = Deprecated" and a note about the preferred tag to use? --Dobratzp (talk) 22:43, 8 December 2015 (UTC)